Skip to comments.
U.S. Military Goes Green, Testing Fuel Cell M1 Abrams Tanks
Daily Tech ^
| Wednesday, July 14, 2010
| Tiffany Kaiser
Posted on 07/14/2010 10:24:17 AM PDT by Willie Green
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-34 next last
To: Willie Green
A tank of highly explosive hydrogen fuel in a tank. What could go wrong?
To: Willie Green
So a 60 ton tank is gonna sneak up on someone? Will it involve high speed rail?
3
posted on
07/14/2010 10:26:37 AM PDT
by
driftdiver
(I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
To: OldDeckHand
In addition, the use of a fuel cell would make the tank's motor run in near silence. I guess they are going to have silent treads too!
4
posted on
07/14/2010 10:27:32 AM PDT
by
a fool in paradise
(I wish our president loved the US military as much as he loves Paul McCartney.)
To: OldDeckHand
“The use of a fuel cell would be convenient as well because the hydrogen would be extracted from JP-8 diesel fuel onboard and converted into electricity, meaning that “the current refueling infrastructure would remain in place.” “
5
posted on
07/14/2010 10:29:08 AM PDT
by
ArrogantBustard
(Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
To: ArrogantBustard
Not a bad idea if it works.
6
posted on
07/14/2010 10:30:54 AM PDT
by
Perdogg
(Nancy Pelosi did more damage to America on 03/21 than Al Qaeda did on 09/11)
To: Willie Green
There was an article in last month’s Semper Fi magazine (The magazine of the Marine Corps League) about the Marine Corps going green. I have also read an article about it within the last year in the Marine Corps Gazette. However, I have to say that I agree with what they are trying to do. They are trying to use more renewables and be more independent because the more energy they use at a forward operating base, the more resupply convoys they need and the more chances to hit the convoys with IEDs and ambushes.
I think our Marine forward operating bases are becoming too dependent on technology and using too much energy. The Marine footprint has always been small and they should not be energy hogs needing constant resupply. They should be able to operate independently and they need to strive towards that.
To: Willie Green
Silent tanks.
Now we know why we don’t have this technology in cars.
And we also know that we will have it in cars once the technology is well known and everybody has it.
I’m OK using gas until our guys get done blowing up our enemies.
8
posted on
07/14/2010 10:32:51 AM PDT
by
dockkiller
(COME AND TAKE IT.)
To: driftdiver
Will it involve high speed rail? only if they can run the rails through pork-barrel lovin' senator's districts and call it 'stimulus'.
9
posted on
07/14/2010 10:33:42 AM PDT
by
WOBBLY BOB
(drain the swamp! ( then napalm it and pave it over ))
To: Perdogg
The decision to use a turbine engine in the M1 was controversial, in the 1970s. I believe it has been vindicated.
The use of fuel cells is also likely to be controversial, but good science and engineering practice would be to test extensively and follow the data. If it's a bad idea, we'll know why. If it's a good idea, we'll be a step or two ahead of the bad guys. And that's always a good place to be.
10
posted on
07/14/2010 10:37:11 AM PDT
by
ArrogantBustard
(Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
To: Willie Green
Another green wet dream bites the dust of reality.
11
posted on
07/14/2010 10:37:13 AM PDT
by
Cheetahcat
(Zero the Wright kind of Racist! We are in a state of War with Democrats)
To: Willie Green
In addition, the use of a fuel cell would make the tank's motor run in near silence. This is a particularly helpful feature since enemy combatants can hear the current model's 1,000+hp multi fuel turbine engine from miles away, and with a silent engine, the tank can sneak into certain territory relatively unheard. --I'd sure like to see a simplified engineering diagram of this---
12
posted on
07/14/2010 10:37:43 AM PDT
by
rellimpank
(--don't believe anything the MSM tells you about firearms or explosives--NRA Benefactor)
To: Willie Green
A lot of the energy in JP-8 is in the carbon bonds (sorry, I don't have a ratio of the energy from burning the whole molecule compared to extracting the hydrogen and burning it). That means that you have less total energy available. So either the fuel cell is a lot more efficient than the turbine, or the M1's already low gas mileage will drop even further.
13
posted on
07/14/2010 10:41:31 AM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(Gun control was originally to protect Klansmen from their victims. The basic reason hasn't changed.)
To: dockkiller
Silent tanks. You could hear a tank coming for 2 miles away, engine or no engine.
14
posted on
07/14/2010 10:42:11 AM PDT
by
dragnet2
To: ArrogantBustard
The turbine works on the M1, but it’s THIRSTY.
Unlike the diesel IC alternative, it sucks fuel even when standing still.
Every tank since the M1 has chosen the modern IC diesel and even The US Army has said that the M1’s replacement will more than likely not use the turbine again.
15
posted on
07/14/2010 10:42:16 AM PDT
by
SJSAMPLE
To: SJSAMPLE
The US Army has said that the M1s replacement will more than likely not use the turbine again. Perhaps this explains why they're looking at fuel cells? My first thought on reading this was that it would resolve the problems of eating gas while standing still. My second thought is that JP8 is a fairly heavy fuel, and IIRC fuel cells extract usable energy only from the hydrogen; the carbon is thrown away. I'm more than a little curious as to the total system efficiency compared to a diesel or turbine engine.
16
posted on
07/14/2010 10:47:54 AM PDT
by
ArrogantBustard
(Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
To: rellimpank
When I get home from work, I’ll Photoshop an Abrams tiptoeing toward the enemy wearing oversized bunny slippers.
17
posted on
07/14/2010 10:50:04 AM PDT
by
RandallFlagg
(30-year smoker, E-Cigs helped me quit, and O wants me back smoking again?)
To: Willie Green
The last thing any tank needs is to go green. You can ALWAYS get a fillup. You just swing the main gun in the direction of the gas station office...
18
posted on
07/14/2010 10:50:09 AM PDT
by
PzLdr
("The Emperor is not as forgiving as I am" - Darth Vader)
To: rellimpank
In addition, the use of a fuel cell would make the tank's motor run in near silence. This is a particularly helpful feature since enemy combatants can hear the current model's 1,000+hp multi fuel turbine engine from miles away, and with a silent engine, the tank can sneak into certain territory relatively unheard.
An interesting quote considering that the Iraqi insurgents referred to the M1A2 as "Whispering Death" due to the low noise signature of its turbine engine compared with the diesels used by the British MBT. And on the subject of what another poster said about tracks the M1A2s tracks are tensioned so they don't make nearly as much noise as traditional tracks. Not silent, but no worse than big off road wheels. Makes them a PITA to change though.
No harm in experimenting though. A while back they tried to run a B-52 off of coal dust, just to see if it could be done. If the gas supply does get cut off it isn't a bad idea to have a plan B available. After all the turbine was a plan B due to the fact that we couldn't rely on the quality of foreign fuel supplies. So they built an engine that could run on almost any flammable liquid.
19
posted on
07/14/2010 10:50:11 AM PDT
by
GonzoGOP
(There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
To: RandallFlagg
“a new hybrid Army aircraft that resembles a blimp “
“Frank it’s the big hit
It’s the blimp
It’s the blimp Frank
It’s the blimp”
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-34 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson